3 ms·
> It must be one of the richest charities in the world with the billions of dollars of commission it earns from search from Google et al. It's not even in the
by miles 9y ago
> It must be one of the richest charities in the world with the billions of dollars of commission it earns from search from Google et al.
It's not even in the top 20 of U.S.-based charities:
Mozilla’s consolidated reported revenue (Mozilla Foundation, Mozilla Corporation and all subsidiaries) for CY 2016 was $520M (US), as compared to $421M in 2015.[0]
The Largest U.S. Charities For 2016[1]
1. United Way Worldwide, $3.708 billion.
2. Task Force for Global Health, $3.154 billion.
3. Feeding America, $2.150 billion.
...
20. American Heart Association, $634 million.
[0] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/foundation/annualreport/2016/
[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampbarrett/2016/12/14/the-largest-u-s-charities-for-2016/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/williampbarrett/2016/12/14/the-...
- saurik 9y agoWhen I read that comment, I thought "I see where you are coming from, but clearly you are exaggerating". Then you left your comment, which claims to disprove it, but has in fact conclusively demonstrated its truth. Mozilla is apparently competing favorably with the 20th largest charity in the entire US?! Yeah: this is like the American Heart Association saying "we finally have managed to allocate one full-time employee to look into the connection between sugar and heart issues" :/. You do realize that there are a lot of non-profits, right? I went to a meeting in Santa Barbara that was just people representing various local non-profits (or people who were thinking of starting a non-profit), and the room was packed. I remembered them saying something like "there are almost a thousand non-profits right here in Santa Barbara". I just did a quick search, and found a site saying that there are estimated 400-1000 non-profits in Santa Barbara. So yes: it is (apparently, as demonstrated by your "rebuttal"), entirely fair to say that Mozilla "is one of the richest charities in the world".
- jermaustin1 9y agoI was soo ready to agree with GP, in fact I upvoted them, because the rebuttal stands in my opinion (they aren't the richest in the world and they don't make 9 figures), but you are also so very right... Why the eff haven't they hired a $120k/yr rounding error to work on the application? Maybe they have tried, but no one wanted the job (especially to do solo). There could be plenty of answers to this, but I wish they would have hired a team of developers.
- sangnoir 9y agoMy best guess is that Thunderbird has no internal sponsor: email is not sexy tech - Mozilla is made up of people, and people would rather work on cutting-edge compiler research, "IoT" or the money-maker (Fx).
- pfranz 9y agoYou're probably right about having no internal sponsor, but I'm sure you could find some people that still find an email client sexy. Old boring tech seems to get some modern, trendy traction every once in awhile; Google Inbox, Sparrow, Airmail. For awhile Twitter clients were pushing the boundaries of UX and recently chat applications seem to have steam.
- jahlove 9y agoFirefox makes money for Mozilla. Thunderbird does not. QED.